THE IMPORTANCE OF LANGUAGE OR THE MEANING OF LOGOS

When analyzing JEM (Jewish Esoteric Moralization) we will quickly discover that language is primary. This is not to discount other mythic symbols or other narrative elements. It is nevertheless to emphasize an important point. Here the use of specifics words and the nuanced meanings of these words, where even relatively obscure rather than primary senses are intended, is critical. “Wordplay” it is often called.

JEM will also often feature colloquial words that have only recently come into use. Particularly in a pre-internet world, these words may or may not have been widely known at the time. Likewise these words may with time become well known and part of the language or alternatively fall into obscurity. This study will contain such examples. This verbal sophistication, by itself, adds a level of esotericism to JEM. Typically, as with the social and political references appearing in JEM, these new words carry some meaningful cultural import.

To be sure, nearly all things colloquial are known early, if not first, among Jews, the most linguistically gifted and cosmopolitan of all people on earth. The bearers of language, the Titian Prometheus and The God Mercury, well represent them. Hence they exist at the very formation of language. Naturally they would conceive of a God that is “The Word.” In the past, this advantage was doubtlessly owed in some part to the fact that Jews are invariably concentrated in the great cultural crossroads of the world: cities, especially large ones.

To be sure, nearly all things colloquial are known early, if not first, among Jews, the most linguistically gifted and cosmopolitan of all people on earth. The bearers of language, the Titian Prometheus and The God Mercury, well represent them.

But here the knowledge of language is only a small part of this advantage. Rather it is through the skilled use of language —even the seemingly least pretentious, simplest and most accessible of language— by which they gain the advantage. In JEM, words are used much more carefully, much more knowledgeably and with much greater precision than elsewhere.

In JEM we often encounter even a “legalistic” or “Talmudic” use of words where it seems each word “has an alibi!” There the “devil” is very often in the details and the interpreter must pay careful attention. Jews, in general, use language in a manner, more precisely, carefully and knowledgeably than Aryans. This is simply objective. Though it is also replicable at least among a required Apollonian class. You, reader, must aspire to this class.

Indeed, in my estimation, “language” is, indeed, the simple, clear and final meaning of this concept of Logos as it appeared first among the early Greek philosophers and continued through Christianity. After all, logos meant originally, simply: “word, speech, statement, discourse.”

The Stoics developed the word to mean something more abstract: the active reason animating and pervading the universe. There the word and notion took on material qualities. It became nature, God, but then also, a spiritual principle, Anima Mundi. Yet here it is important to realize that the Stoics are, of course, speaking in metaphor.

Naturally philosophers whose only will to power is “Logos” or language are eager to make “the word” or “Logos” God. After all, if one can convince the world to worship what they are best at, they rule the world. More there is something inherently true here. Language, and its skilled use, is indeed, a potent will to power, particularly in civilized society. Jews have shown this decisively. Thus Logos may mean “persuasion” as much as it may mean anything else.

There does appear an effort, especially by Aristotle, to develop the word toward something meaning “logic” or, more specifically, discourse devoid of “pathos” and “ethos.” It was an effort to ennoble “discourse” or Logos in general. This seems at the root of the Aryan Christian instinct to equate Logos with order and an order imposing God. However this is a corruption of the words original and actual meaning.

Likewise the notion that the Christian God or Christ is devoid of “pathos” and “ethos” is absurd on its face. “Pathos” is the manipulative pith of Christianity whose “ethos” or tone is frequently as Jewish as civil rights era propaganda. “Logos” is “law”or “order” in Christianity only so far as what Christ has said and is, is sacred, inviolable. It is not “law” or “order” because Christ is a “God of order, reason or logic.” History proves that surely he is not.

Jews, gifted in the use of words, can be trusted to deploy them correctly if often deceptively. Hence, the Stoical sense of Logos, and not the Aristotelian sense, is that deployed in John: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, but the darkness has not overcome it.” [1]

When the Book of John equates God with “Logos”, the extreme power of language and its skilled use is being extolled. It is unnecessary to imagine something more.

This resonates magnificently. Jews have become “God” especially through language. The light shining “in the darkness” indicated here is not an Apollonian light but an earthly Promethean or Vulcanian light as this study explicates. Again, clearly John is speaking in metaphor, extolling the extreme power of language and its skilled use.

About Jesus John said: “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.”[2] In Christianity, the words of Christ, the words of the apostles, the words depicting these figures, are “God” or “Divine” as much as those figures themselves. Indeed, they exist through “The Word”, whatever their actual historicity.

Here, though, there may even be an esoteric indication Christ and God are literary or linguistic inventions. Such an ostensibly devious indication in the JEM here would not be uncharacteristic as we shall see. In other words, God or Christ are merely “The Word” or words. Again, as history has shown, this has not made them any less powerful or “real”, quite the contrary.

We must assume this “Logos” or verbal ability, along with the whole of Greek philosophy, was, at least at its root, a Semitic will to power. Here the tension was, as always, with a more beautiful, physically powerful and militarily superior Aryan. Again, the Hebrew, in fact, may indicate that among Jewish esotericists this “gift of gab” is a weapon.

For example, the word Milah, מילה, which, again, means “word” and “circumcision” or Hemilah, המילה, which means “circumcision” and “The Word.” Circumcision, as we will see, is a concept deeply related to a notion of castrating, usurping as well as, indeed, admixing with one’s enemies. Here perhaps it is suggested that it is precisely through “The Word” Jews gain an advantage.

None of this, of course, should bias us against the Logos, quite the contrary. Indeed, it is only by the sophisticated ability to communicate that man has developed from a bestial existence at all. More, tremendous power is, indeed, contained in language and its skilled use. Even when compared to powerful visual and musical propaganda, the voice, the word, is devastatingly efficient, clear and, when cryptic, hypnotic.

This is evident in the current trend toward corporate censorship and “platform denial” of right wing forces appearing in the present day where mere podcasts constitute their propaganda. Words may circumcise our adversaries as readily as they have circumcised our parents and ancestors. Hence our adversaries are obliged to “shut us down,” to castrate Caelus as Saturn did. This is where the victorious Jupiter comes into contact with Saturn.

We should understand clearly that the Jewish genius in symbol and word arose because the Jew had no other means to power and less out of natural gifts. Otherwise, Arabia would be brimming with Shakespeares, as the Jew’s genetic distinction from the intelligent Aryan is “merely” that he is roughly half Semitic and half intelligent Aryan.

Women, on average, are more verbal than men for similar reasons. To wit, to persuade power to their ends and to garner sympathy and protection. The need for sublimation was also key. One spoke carefully, listened carefully, found ways of being subtly, incrementally more bold through careful changes in language. The ingredient here is necessity. We have that now. We will shortly be known for our artists and orators.

The consequence of not writing and speaking well is the disappearance of knowledge. We need conservers but if our words are without their own power and charm than they are dust. The consequence of not using symbol well is the disappearance of salubrious art, myth and Religion, is the disappearance of AIM, is the disappearance of our race. We have many enemies. They are destroyed only by our immortality. Hence, we build things to last.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

One thought on “THE IMPORTANCE OF LANGUAGE OR THE MEANING OF LOGOS”

This was a great article. My mind was blown at this part, “Naturally philosophers whose only will to power is “Logos” or language are eager to make “the word” or “Logos” God. After all, if one can convince the world to worship what they are best at, they rule the world.” It made me think of what my ancestors worshiped / valued in its place.